How NOT to carry

foolzrushn

New member
So there's a guy in Kansas that goes to a high school graduation being held in a football stadium, that has 'no firearms' posted at the entrance. Sometime during the program, his Kel-Tec P-3AT becomes uncomfortable, and he decides to adjust it where he is carrying it, in his sock. As he adjusts it, it discharges through his foot, ricochets off of the concrete grandstand floor and hits a lady standing some fifty feet away in the calf. He was able to drive himself to the hospital, and the lady will recover.

The authorities are now trying to decide what if any charges to file, possibly a class B misdemeanor. There is discussion whether Kansas laws permit someone with a CCW to carry in a posted football stadium (something that would be illegal for a non CCW individual). The interpretation of whether a football stadium is a building or not may come into play, and whether it falls under Federal or State law.

As you know, the Kel-Tec is double action only and is supposed to have around a five pound trigger pull. Of course it may have been modified.

The point is that even with a stiff trigger and double action, he unintentionally fired the weapon. Certainly one option would have been to have left it in his vehicle. Particularly since this may fall under Federal law. But no matter where it was being carried, it would have been wise to have purchased something that would have covered the trigger and kept him from the accidental discharge. And with a proper holster it might not have been uncomfortable in the first place.

This could have been much worse and just adds to the perception that people who carry (even those with a CCW) are not safe. I can't argue about that with this guy, he makes us all look bad. I have seen 'sticky pouches' for inside the waistband (IWB) for as little as $15 that would have covered the trigger and probably avoided this whole hot mess. A good ankle holster would have been even better.

Let's all remind ourselves not to depend too much, on a long hard trigger pull and double action alone. A good holster would have been cheap considering.
 

Targa

New member
Yep, you can't fix stupid but sometimes stupid fixes itself. Unfortunately that fix usually comes at the expense of someone else's safety and the perception of gun owners. Clown's like this need to stick with a very dull pocket knife.
 

Pond James Pond

New member
Daft, avoidable incident.

just adds to the perception that people who carry (even those with a CCW) are not safe.

And many are not, truth be told. The same applies to other groups who should know better, given their training; road-users being the obvious example.

Punishments aside, I think the best KN could do with this is use it as a case study for all those doing their CCW course in the dangers of not carrying wisely, sock-carry being one example, IMHO. Potential licencees should be made to understand the risks that were taken both in terms of life-and-limb and legal ramifications for the carrier, including if someone had suffered more than a wound to the calf.

Finally, it should also serve as a good lesson on why a holster is necessary, something a CCW class ought to cover if they don't already.
 

dogtown tom

New member
foolzrushn...... The interpretation of whether a football stadium is a building or not may come into play, and whether it falls under Federal or State law.

....... Particularly since this may fall under Federal law...
There is no Federal law that addresses concealed carry of firearms. Whoever is pontificating about how Federal law may apply hasn't a clue and should not be consulted about firearms law period.
 

foolzrushn

New member
dogtown tom

I'm no lawyer, but I thought that the deliberation was based on two things.

First, the Federal Gun-Free School Zone Act (GFSZA) which was struck down but renacted in 1996.

And second, that Kansas had recently passed a law permitting CCW on school campuses.

The possible conflict between the two may have caused a 'grey area' in the law.

So there is a law, however the guy with the hole in his foot may be exempt by the 18 U.S.C. 922(q) (2)(B) (ii) exemption of State licensing anyway.

Whether he is exempt or not, his foolish actions might have caused something much more serious, just because he didn't use the proper equipment for an ankle carry. He probably thought that the double action was enough. And it might have been, except for his fooling around with it. Still, it all should have been avoided for the price of a holster.
 
Last edited:
Carrying a handgun in his Argyle's. ~~Really

No knowing what the penalty of Law calls for in the perpetrators State.
In my State a Class B misdemeanor garners too little punishment for this circumstance. Class B_is a typical police charging used to punish shoplifters i.e. $2000.00 Max fine and no more than 6 months jail time.
Class A Misdemeanor Charging at bare Mininum would be more better suited since a innocent citizen was shot not counting the perpetrators self inflicted injury.
"Oh well this dangerous situation it didn't take place in my school district. That's the main thing."
 

+1k ammo

New member
It was clearly posted no firearms. He should have left in car.
What if it had hit a graduate in the head instead of calf.
Idiot!
 

dogtown tom

New member
foolzrushn I'm no lawyer, but I thought that the deliberation was based on two things.

First, the Federal Gun-Free School Zone Act (GFSZA) which was struck down but renacted in 1996.
Which has nothing to do with concealed carry.
The federal GFSZA prohibits ANY firearm possession within 1,000 ft of a school, not just concealed carry of a handgun. One of the exceptions is the individual possessing the firearm is licensed by that state....and there are other exceptions as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(25):
The term "school zone" means—
(A) in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private school; or
(B) within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public, parochial or private school.
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(26) the term "school" means a school which provides elementary or secondary education, as determined under State law.





And second, that Kansas had recently passed a law permitting CCW on school campuses.
BRAVO Kansas! (but do they let teachers carry?)



The possible conflict between the two may have caused a 'grey area' in the law.
What gray area?
If Kansas has a concealed carry permit the individual meets the exemption mentioned in the GFSZA.
If Kansas allows concealed carry on school property, the individual has a license.

The only possible charges would be related to his negligence or discharging a firearm.



....Still, it all should have been avoided for the price of a holster.
Yup. A $9 Uncle Mikes holster is cheap compared to what he's going to pay that ER doc and the lady that was injured.
 

Indawind

New member
I will probably get flamed but this is an example of why some people should not carry.

No holster. Check
In your SOCK Check
Too bad it didn't ricochet straight up so his special skills are taken out of the gene pool.

It was clearly posted no firearms. He should have left in car.

Not to be flippant but am I out of line to ask, Really?

For me AO the only force of law the sign carries is a trespass charge IF you are asked to leave, and you do not. I am sure that someone I might need a gun for is not caring about a sign saying he can't have a Beretta. I don't carry a Beretta either ;)

I always love those Beretta signs

Concealed is Concealed.
 

foolzrushn

New member
dogtown tom

Which has nothing to do with concealed carry.

Disagree, CC just happens to be the State license that he has, so it has something to do with this case.

The federal GFSZA prohibits ANY firearm possession within 1,000 ft of a school, not just concealed carry of a handgun.

True, I don't think I said or implied that it was all about CC. There are other exemptions as well.

One of the exceptions is the individual possessing the firearm is licensed by that state....and there are other exceptions as well.

I should have said "as licensed by the State". Yes, he is licensed for concealed carry by the State...which is the exempted license in GFSZA that applies to him, and may save his bacon.

So I see a connection there, for his case. If he didn't have the CC license (and you don't have to have one in Kansas to CC if you are a resident), he would be in a much bigger jam because he would not have the exemption, and would be in violation of GFSZA. I don't see why you say it has nothing to do with CC (in his case) when that particular license is what might keep him from doing time.

BRAVO Kansas! (but do they let teachers carry?)
It's my understanding that State employees can carry. I believe that this would apply to teachers at State colleges. Since lower grades are paid for by local taxes and vary from school district to district, they may not technically be State employees, but local government (school district) employees. Although their retirement fund is State run.

It doesn't seem to me that many teachers are publicly promoting CC in schools, but are generally against having guns in schools. Which is surprising considering some of the things that happen there. If they want to carry they would need a CC license to be exempt from GFSZA, unless they are State employees.

But back to the case at hand, I still have trouble understanding how he pulled a double action 5# trigger even though it was in his sock. Don't the Kel-Tecs have a fairly long trigger pull? If you are gonna carry in your sock, you better be a lot more careful about moving things around.

Perhaps some CC instructors don't stress the actual equipment for CC enough. I will bet that he becomes a poster boy for using better judgement and equipment with instructors.

But I don't want to argue with you. I see you are from Texas, and I could never win a case against a Texas lawyer. :D
 

SailingOnBy

New member
I will probably get flamed but this is an example of why some people should not carry.

You should be praised for it, not flamed. This idiot is part of the problem for gun owners.

In WA State (which I realize this is not):

RCW 9a.36.050
Reckless endangerment.
(1) A person is guilty of reckless endangerment when he or she recklessly engages in conduct not amounting to drive-by shooting but that creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another person.
(2) Reckless endangerment is a gross misdemeanor.

Every person convicted of a gross misdemeanor for which no punishment is prescribed in any statute in force at the time of conviction and sentence, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a maximum term fixed by the court of up to three hundred sixty-four days, or by a fine in an amount fixed by the court of not more than five thousand dollars, or by both such imprisonment and fine.

Throw the book at this idiot, someone could have been killed. Then take civil action against him. Stupidity should hurt.
 

TXAZ

New member
Darwin Award nominee, 3rd class.

As for throwing the book at him SailingOnBy, he's going to have a daily reminder and millstone that will restrict/ cost him more than any law.
 

Onward Allusion

New member
One of these in the right size would have help big time.

71PlXJZVNFL._SL1200_.jpg
 

gyvel

New member
Regardless of how the courts will or will not punish him, I think his clock is going to be cleaned in the resultant lawsuit. Now THAT'S going to be a constant reminder.
 

Dashunde

New member
You should be praised for it, not flamed. This idiot is part of the problem for gun owners.

Agreed.
He should get a month in county jail as an example to other would-be-idiots who might carry in their damn sock! :rolleyes:
I mean, really... how stupid+paranoid can a guy be?
By paranoid I mean he's sooo desperate to carry that he resorts to sock carry? comon... any fool can see the risk of carrying that way exceeds the risk of needing a 380 in a stadium.
Nevermind the possibility of it falling out and being scooped up by a kid..

Besides.. its a dinky little 380, he can't conjure up a better place than his sock.. was he wearing only socks and underwear?
 
Top